Comments by sez_me

JDBarnes, you are wrong about the doctors. They are struggling too. Read an article by this same author, ITW about primary care going the way of the dodo (extinct) written in the past year or so.

Doctors who take insurance are then beholden to take whatever the insurance company will "reimburse" them. Doctors have to hire staff to learn how to code diagnoses (required by the insurance companies and there are ever changing rules) and do paper work and hire staff to keep track of the bookkeeping and accounts receivable.

Medicare is about to go bankrupt and is not sustainable. Patients keep paying higher and higher health insurance premiums but it's not like the doctors get a part of that pot of cash.

Doctors get paid measly contracted rates decided by the insurance company monopolies and Medicare. When you see your accountant, attorney, hairdresser or caterer you pay him or her his asked-fee at the time of service. Not so with doctors who accept insurance. They get "reimbursed" pennies on the dollar months later.

Don't blame the doctors for the expensive prices of things in healthcare these days. They're the foot soldiers who keep motoring along as the job keeps getting harder and harder and buried in paperwork and frustration. The doctors these days are much worse off economically than they were ten and twenty years ago.

It's not such a smooth go for healthcare in Canada and many of their citizens who can afford to come to the States and are willing for state-of-the-art medical expertise. Go live in Sweden and pay more than 50% of your earnings to taxes.

Everybody always wants the best health care Other People's Money can provide. It's expensive to provide goods and services. People don't have the right to goods and services provided by others. It's not a right. It's a privilege to be able to have these free services.

We have some safety nets in place. The medical community has always provided lots of charitable care and services to those in the area who need it. No one will be turned away from an Emergency Dept if they seek care there.

Why does ITW think that all the onus and responsibility lies on Cottage's shoulders? A recent article by ITW in this Indy disclosed that the woman who spent three nights outside after discharge from Cottage had a sister and a daughter.

Why is there no responsibility of these family members to take care of their own in a time of vulnerability and need? Were they unable or unwilling themselves? Or not even contacted as possible resources to help smooth out the transition from hospital to independent living?

Perhaps ITW can interview the families of these patients and see what responsibilities they could help take over (financial and helping with getting the patient up to the bathroom) for these patients who are fragile when it's time to leave the acute care hospitals.

Last Nov over 6,000 people voted in City of SB on Measure T, an impotent attempt by the Reefer Madness prohibitionists (Byrne, Rowse, Self and Francisco, but especially Sharon "Don't Cannabis Our Kids" Byrne) to get votes to ban the storefront medical cannabis collective dispensaries.

This measure was soundly defeated by 66% of those who voted voting "No" on the ban.

Byrne was the main instigator in this war on safe access. This special measure cost something like $50,000 to put on the ballot....to find out what we already knew. People want safe access to medical marijuana for patients whose symptoms are relieved by cannabis. We currently have five permitted, well run, supervised, accountable to city authority dispensaries in town.

These people (Rowse, Francisco, Self and especially Byrne) are out of touch with their own neighbors and community. And one of them, Rowse is a bar owner, booze slinger whose wife is on the board of CADA. Alcohol has killed more people and damaged more health and ruined more lives in this town that centuries of marijuana use.

How about banning *this* dispensary? It's huge. It has guns, tobacco, empty-calorie high fructose corn syrup sugary snacks and alcohol readily visible on its shelves and children can easily gain access to the premises at any time without any regulation. It's called Walmart.

Now....try walking up to the security-guarded door of a local cannabis dispensary and try to gain admission. You'll be firmly turned away unless you have your papers in order and are a member of the collective.

It says, " To ensure that seriously ill Californians have the right to obtain and use marijuana for medical purposes where that medical use is deemed appropriate and has been recommended by a physician who has determined that the person's health would benefit from the use of marijuana in the treatment of cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity, glaucoma, arthritis, migraine, *or any other illness* for which marijuana provides relief. "

The text and actual wording of the Proposition says, "or any other illness for which marijuana provides relief" That sentence was painted deliberately with a very broad brush. The law allows physicians to decide what is best for patients' symptom relief.

Cannabis is much safer for pain, anxiety and insomnia than Xanax or oxycontin or alcohol and any number of legal substances.

Who are you (cartoonz) to split hairs and decide who should or shouldn't meet the definition of benefiting from the therapeutic, medicinal effects of medical marijuana.

Health care became conflated with health insurance coverage. They aren't one and the same. Healthcare is not a right. No one has the right to goods and services that are provided by others.

Health insurance became prepaid healthcare in peoples' minds. They figure they are paying all those premiums each month; they want something back. They feel entitled to get something. They want all aspects of medical care for free, just by plunking down an insurance card.

Car insurance doesn't pay for oil or tire changes. Homeowner's insurance doesn't cover painting the kitchen or redoing the bathroom. Health insurance was originally meant to cover catastrophic costs. It's a very inefficient system to try to pay for routine visits and health maintenance. Think of all the folks you have to hire to process all those small ticket nickel and dime claims. During WWII when salaries were otherwise frozen, the way big companies could reward their loyal workers was by increasing what their health insurance would cover.

Why should doctors have to wait to be "reimbursed" at 50 cents on the dollar (or less), months after they've given service to a patient? We pay our attorneys, accountants and even our hair dressers at the time of service. Why should medical care be so very different?

Ya want "free care?" Single-party payor? Good luck with finding a quality doctor who will be willing to take your government insurance and its crappy reimbursement. Get ready for system bloat and inefficiency. Get ready to wait weeks to see newly minted PAs (physician assistants) and Dr. nurses who don't know what they don't know. Think that will keep costs down?

And don't forget, Sheri Leigh that because of Sharon Byrne and her "Don't cannabis our kids" campaign the taxpayers of the City of SB got to pay for an expensive special election for ballot measure T last November.

We won 66% to keep safe access via store front dispensaries. "No on T" prevailed over the Prohibitionists like Ms. Byrne. And then the sore losers who supported the ban claimed that the wording was confusing, that voting "yes" meant no marijuana. Lame excuse. Voting "no" was a vote to defeat the ban and the majority of the voters got that straight and voted to maintain safe access.

How noble is it to waste money like that by being unable to compromise or hear what your community is telling you (we support safe access) and forcing a special election?

A report from the respected RAND Corporation has confirmed that medical cannabis dispensaries do not increase crime in their neighborhoods. On the contrary, they reduce it.

The report compared crime reported in areas around dispensaries in Los Angeles while they were operating and after they were closed by order of the LA City Council, as well as those that remained open. RAND found that crime rates more than doubled in the neighborhoods where the medical cannabis collectives were forced to close.

That finding is consistent with statewide data gathered in California over many years by Americans for Safe Access (ASA). Public officials from one end of the state to the other have reported that sound regulations for the operation of dispensaries have resulted in less crime and fewer community complaints.

“Regulated dispensaries don’t just provide safe access for the elderly and most seriously ill,” said ASA Executive Director Steph Sherer. “They make the community safer.” .....